One of the world's most important tests of post-conflict reconstruction and reconciliation took place roughly according to much-revised plans on October 9 when Afghanistan went to the polls for the first time in its turbulent existence to elect a new national government to replace the UN-sponsored interim administration charged with running the country for the past three years since the ouster of the Taliban regime by an international military coalition.

Interim President Hamid Karzai had widely been expected to outdistance the other 16 contestants but it was uncertain whether he would attain an outright majority in this first round of voting to avoid a runoff in April at the same time as parliamentary elections. Among the 16 candidates were two of the most prominent warlords, Abdul Rashid Dostum and Haji Mohammed Mohaqeeq of the minority Uzbek and Hazara tribes.

The run-up to the elections had been tense in view of continued flare-ups of fighting in various parts of the country, some of which were under the control of local or regional commanders and their militias. In an effort to establish central control over these areas, there would also be occasional forays by central forces and fighting between them and the local contingents. In preparation of the election, nearly 60,000 Afghan police and military, supported by 27,000 international troops had been deployed to protect some 5000 polling places against attack. The perceived threat had been heightened by three attacks on Karzai supporters ahead of the elections.

Manwhile the international coalition and especially US forces had conducted sporadic intensive search and destroy missions against pockets of suspected Al Khaeda or Taliban remnants.

Afghanistan’s provisional President Hamid Karzai was declared the official winner on November 2 of the country’s first-ever Presidential elections with a solid 55% of the vote held several weeks earlier on October 9 .

Zakim Shah, the chairman of the UN-Afghan Joint Electoral Management Body (JEMB), the agency responsible for organizing and monitoring the country’s presidential elections, made the annoucement after JEMB’s review of a report by a three-member independent panel probing alleged election fraud and irregularities. In its report, the independent panel acknowledged that there were some problems, including ballot stuffing and ink used to mark people’s fingers to prevent multiple voting, but added that there was “no evidence” that these problems were widespread. The panel concluded that the scale of these problems could not have materially affected the election outcome.

Syed Hussein Alemi Balkhi, the running mate of former Education Minister Yunus Qanuni, said the report was “unacceptable,” adding that he was not satisfied with the findings. Former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani, who supported Karzai in the elections said, “The coming government should not be formed according to the vote. We should have formula to achieve national reconciliation in Afghanistan, security and political stability.”

With a direct mandate from the Afghan people, Karzai is now empowered to choose his own cabinet. However, his choices will have to be ratified once the National Assembly is established following parliamentary elections in April 2005.

Leaders around the world, including Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair, German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, have congratulated Karzai on his election success. The election is seen as having reinforced the legitimacy of the Afghan government and should solidify continued support from the international donor community. Element of reconstruction.

Afghanistan’s nation rebuilding and reconstruction process had come a long way to the historic direct presidential election. An interim administration was installed following the Bonn Agreement in December 2001. The first recurrent (ordinary) budget was announced together with the National Development Framework in April 2002. The Emergency Loya Jirga was held in June 2002 followed by the installation of the transitional government led by President Karzai. The new constitution characterised by Islam as the national religion, a centralised power at the presidency, and gender equality in principle, was approved by the “constitutional Loya Jirga” and signed into law in January 2004. The first population census was carried out successfully under difficult political and security circumstances and paved the ground for voter registration toward the presidential election.

Prior to the election Karzai took steps to remove wartime leaders from government authority, first by dropping Defense Minister Fahim from the vice president candidacy, and then removing Ismail Khan as governor of Herat which triggered some local violence.

The official designation of President Karzai set the stage for the nomination of a new Government and Cabinet with perhaps some gesture of openness toward rival factions in the country and also for the forthcoming Parliamentary elections scheduled for April 2005.

Alliance sees need for forces

As planning intensified for the Parliamentary elections, it also highlighted the European and Western role. NATO civilian and military representatives in the country, told Alliance headquarters on October 27 that “more security support” would be need for the legislative elections than was the case for the Presidential vote. Hikmet Cetin, the civilian representative, and General Jean-Louis Py, Commander of the International Security and Assistance Force (ISAF) both said that more forces would be require and the latter explained this was because the vote would take place at the provincial and district levels for the upper and lower house.

It was also suggested that it had been difficult to operate with the two commands inside the country, the UN and NATO ISAF mission aimed at stabilising the country and the US-led coalition Enduring Freedom command aimed at fighting terrorism.

Threat Alters Election Plans

The mounting climate of insecurity in Afghanistan was underlined in July when the first round of national elections scheduled for September were further delayed and the international health organisation, Medecins sans Frontiers (MSF), announced its withdrawal after 25 years in the country dating back to just after the Soviet invasion.

Karzai had pledged repeatedly to hold the elections in September, despite mounting violence against election workers and concern that regional military leaders would use intimidation to strengthen their influence. NATO had also agreed in July to increase its forces from 6,500 to 10,000 to try to improve security during the elections but Karzai had urged for troops be sent immediately.

The latest delay followed several weeks of attacks on election workers and ordinary voters. Analysts expressed doubt whether the vote itself could be any better protected, despite thousands of foreign troops and newly trained Afghan security forces.

Presidential and parliamentary elections had already been delayed from June and October was seen as the last chance to hold a vote before snow closed high passes in the Hindu Kush until the spring of 2005. Karzai had insisted that delaying the formation of parliament would betray Afghans' hopes, some three years after the ousting of the Taliban regime and more than two decades after the nation was plunged into a series of ruinous wars.

International officials have been warning for months that security was inadequate to hold the election. The United Nations had said that warlords and faction leaders - some in government – should disarm their private armies to keep the vote credible. There was concern also many would vote along lines dictated by local strongmen and wealthy drug barons, undermining the hopes of independent candidates.

Some 5.5 million of the estimated 9.5 million eligible Afghans already signed up, including two million women but there was some uncertainty regarding accurate population figures.

MSF Withdraws

The international medical and health NGO, MSF, blamed its decision on its inability to continue operating in the face of heightened insecurity created by the US-led coalition’s tactic of using military Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRCs), once viewed as a breakthrough and model in establishing stability in war-torn regions. The action could have repercussions and cast some doubt of the effectiveness of the plans mapped out by the international forces and NATO to increase its presence and expand the PRC network in order to attempt to stabilise the country in time for these and other Presidential election in 2005.

MSF said insecurity had grown in the country since the PRCs had blurred the distinction between independent humanitarian relief efforts and military security activities.

The Nobel peace prize-winning organisation took the decision after five of its workers had been killed two months earlier by Taliban or other organisations hostile to the international coalition and the Kabul regime who accused MSF of collaborating and spying for these forces. MSF spokesmen and leaders said the situation in the ground had worsened because of this confusion and cited one example of propaganda leaflets circulated among the populations by the US forces promising residents a bag of rice for information leading to the capture of underground Taliban fighters. It also blamed the Kabul government of Hamid Karzai for failing to counter such ambiguity and to establish greater stability.

In effect the organisation, which has operated world wide in frequently hostile environments, including in Afghanistan in the war following the Soviet occupation in 1979, concluded that the existing security situation in Afghanistan was untenable for the safety of even its battle-experienced workers.

Such conclusion could cast considerable uncertainty over the security environment and policies envisioned to prepare for parliamentary and presidential elections regarded as crucial to establishing a stable, independent and responsive leadership in the country which has been ravaged by war and turmoil for over 25 years.

“We’re not martyrs or humanitarian mercenaries,” noted MSF Director General Pierre Fally, who also claimed some NGOs or other civilian organisations had established too close a relationship with the coalition military forces. This had led to the belief in Taliban and other hostile forces that even MSF was not an independent or neutral entity. “There is a strategy by many to make us take sides as some do, which we refuse,” he claimed. He said MSF and the International Red Cross had based their reputations and ability to render services to victimised populations by maintaining their independence. He did not preclude a return if the situation evolved but said its decision had been deliberately taken after weeks of review and reflection.

Economy recovers

Starting from the devastated economic base during the conflict years the Afghan economy has shown an estimated 28.6 percent real growth from FY2001/02 to FY2002/03. 3 Main contributors to the high growth rate included recovered agricultural production after drought years, a construction boom underway in urban areas and increased service establishments driven by the donor community’s spending and emergency assistance efforts. The growth rate for FY2003/04 is estimated to be 16 percent.4 While growth in construction and service sectors continued to be strong, the agricultural sector growth has slowed from the previous year’s strong rebound. IMF puts growth projection for FY2004/05 also at 16 percent, implying per capita income of $246, which is still among the lowest in the world.

The state of poverty in Afghanistan is obviously serious but there are no systematic quantitative data based on a rigorously defined poverty line. Indications are that at least more than half of the population would be under the expenditure corresponding to the minimum required food and non-food consumption basket. The National Risk and Vulnerability Survey (NRVA) carried out in 2003 by the Ministry of Rural Rehabilitation and Development, covering 1,850 rural villages and over 11,000 households, estimated rural expenditures at $165 per year per capita.

Opium dominates trade

Trade statistics have long been unavailable from the Afghan authorities since 1992-93. According to an external ad-hoc survey, Afghanistan’s total trade in 2000 was $2.5 billion, comprising about $1.2 billion in imports and about $1.3 billion in exports. Pakistan has been the top trading partner, followed by Iran and other neighbouring countries. According to a statement made by the Pakistani foreign minister in July 2004, the official trade between Afghanistan and Pakistan could reach $1 billion in 2004. However, about 90 percent of the estimated total exports could comprise re-exports,implying that indigenous exports falling significantly short of financing imports. Customs data are believed to cover only two-thirds of total imports and only a fraction of exports because of smuggling. The official figures do not include an estimate of opium exports, which was estimated to be in the order of $2.5 billion in 2002/03. When compared with Afghanistan’s own non-opium exports, opium exports are the overwhelming source of exportrevenues generated with domestic resources. According to the statement made by UNODC in June 2004, Afghanistan was responsible for three-quarters of the world’s illegal opium supply and for a 5 percent increase in the world supply and its production is expected to increase toward 2005.

Non-opium exports consist primarily of carpets, dried fruits, nuts, sheepskins and precious stones while its imports, excluding those for re-export,consist mainly of food items, fuel, transport and agricultural equipment. The re-exports consist of electronics, cosmetics, toiletries,crockery, auto parts, etc. Most of the re-exported goods find their way to Pakistan. It is likely that the opening up of the economy will cause importsto increase more rapidly in the short run.